Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Driving test lifesaver procedure
Options
Comments
-
-
you know what i mean, if you are going round a left bend ( country driving for example) you should be in the offside position , a right bend you should be in the near side position. If the bends come in succession you kinda have to change position on the bend.
Indeed yes, I know that. You should have your positioning done before entering the bend. If we get any more into chicanes, flick-flacks and off-camber uphill bastards tightening, we'll be on about apexes, trail-braking, fronts tucking under, and all kinds of stuff that'll definitely get you failed.
0 -
Indeed yes, I know that. You should have your positioning done before entering the bend. If we get any more into chicanes, flick-flacks and off-camber uphill bastards tightening, we'll be on about apexes, trail-braking, fronts tucking under, and all kinds of stuff that'll definitely get you failed.
Ha! Maybe there on the advanced test!!
I guess what gets me like I said is the inconsistency.
Test no.1 this wasn't an issue. I fixed the areas I mucked up and they were fine this time. My last tester was on a bike.
This tester was in a car.
it shouldn't be relevant but I can't help but wonder0 -
Road theory would say that you should maintain your position through the bends and slow down instead of changing lane position you know what i mean, if you are going round a left bend ( country driving for example) you should be in the offside position , a right bend you should be in the near side position. If the bends come in succession you kinda have to change position on the bend.
Actually an advanced driving book I read (granted it was for cars) suggested that you should hold right around left-hand bends, and hold left around right-hand bends. This gives you more visibility around the corners, and therefore more time to react to hazards. Taking the left edge of a left-hand turn reduces your ability to see around the corner.
I tried it on a left-hand bend one day in the car and nearly got wiped out by some idiot hugging the white line coming the other way. There's a difference between what works in theory and what works in practice 0 -
Road theory would say that you should maintain your position through the bends and slow down instead of changing lane position
Actually an advanced driving book I read (granted it was for cars) suggested that you should hold right around left-hand bends, and hold left around right-hand bends. This gives you more visibility around the corners, and therefore more time to react to hazards. Taking the left edge of a left-hand turn reduces your ability to see around the corner.
I tried it on a left-hand bend one day in the car and nearly got wiped out by some idiot hugging the white line coming the other way. There's a difference between what works in theory and what works in practice
Yea thats what I was saying... Offside for left ( better visibility) and nearside for right bends. Dodgy in a car but on a bike it can give you advanced warning of whats coming.
And to obtain these on/offside positions well in a series of sweeping bends your position has to change at some point on a bend. Yea prefferab;y before the bend but sure thats another topic.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
LookBehindYou wrote: »There is some inconsistency between some testers. It depends on whether they ride a bike themselves normally or not.
rule of thumb is : Move your head before you signal and also before you change position.
Reason = Your helmet restricts your side views, so in order to see something beside you, your mirror will not help, you must turn your helmet for your eyes to see.
Your helmet doesn't restrict your side vision anything like as much as non-bikers think. Glasses wearers have a FAR more restricted field of vision.
Cars have pillars obstructing your vision, and side windows that are often very slow to demist in winter.
I actually feel much more claustrophobic / restricted in vision in the car than on the bike.
Your mirrors won't help spot something right beside you in a lane change, but that's nothing to do with your helmet, just where the mirrors are aimed and the field of view they have. Cars have exactly the same problem, and far too many drivers just use their mirrors (if we're lucky) and never think to look out their side window.
From some of the descriptions in this thread of what's required on test, it still sounds very much like the one I did in 1996. You were required to ride as if your bike had no indicators or mirrors, so hand signals for everything and shoulder checks for everything.
I thought the test had moved on since then, perhaps not?
Discretion is needed, the lifesaver (i.e. the last thing you do before a turn, but before you commit) is needed but shoulder checks on every minor lane position change?? Not always. If you are already fully aware of the situation beside/behind you then it's only distracting you from what's ahead, which is more likely to hurt you. The rider needs to use his or her judgement, is the only sensible answer.
It seems we're back to very slow, exaggerated, unrealistic riding (while being followed by a box-ticker in a cage) which shows the test hasn't really moved on from years ago at all. Why bother with all the fancy requirements for IBT if the thing which actually gives you your licence doesn't bear relation to real-world riding and isn't examined by a rider?
All tests should be done with an examiner on a bike, for starters, and it should be less about ticking boxes (in fairness, hard to do while riding a bike ) and more about what demonstrates real-world good judgement and control, rather than rigidity that no-one follows except on test, and arguably isn't even the safest way to ride even in the artificial environment of the test.
Rant over.Fingal County Council are certainly not competent to be making decisions about the most important piece of infrastructure on the island. They need to stick to badly designed cycle lanes and deciding on whether Mrs Murphy can have her kitchen extension.
0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
Your helmet doesn't restrict your side vision anything like as much as non-bikers think. Glasses wearers have a FAR more restricted field of vision.
Cars have pillars obstructing your vision, and side windows that are often very slow to demist in winter.
I actually feel much more claustrophobic / restricted in vision in the car than on the bike.
Your mirrors won't help spot something right beside you in a lane change, but that's nothing to do with your helmet, just where the mirrors are aimed and the field of view they have. Cars have exactly the same problem, and far too many drivers just use their mirrors (if we're lucky) and never think to look out their side window.
From some of the descriptions in this thread of what's required on test, it still sounds very much like the one I did in 1996. You were required to ride as if your bike had no indicators or mirrors, so hand signals for everything and shoulder checks for everything.
I thought the test had moved on since then, perhaps not?
Discretion is needed, the lifesaver (i.e. the last thing you do before a turn, but before you commit) is needed but shoulder checks on every minor lane position change?? Not always. If you are already fully aware of the situation beside/behind you then it's only distracting you from what's ahead, which is more likely to hurt you. The rider needs to use his or her judgement, is the only sensible answer.
It seems we're back to very slow, exaggerated, unrealistic riding (while being followed by a box-ticker in a cage) which shows the test hasn't really moved on from years ago at all. Why bother with all the fancy requirements for IBT if the thing which actually gives you your licence doesn't bear relation to real-world riding and isn't examined by a rider?
All tests should be done with an examiner on a bike, for starters, and it should be less about ticking boxes (in fairness, hard to do while riding a bike ) and more about what demonstrates real-world good judgement and control, rather than rigidity that no-one follows except on test, and arguably isn't even the safest way to ride even in the artificial environment of the test.
Rant over.
I agree with ninja on many points but the OP was about the test requirements for observation. All points raised in ninjas post are valid but are also what we would practice post test in a more advanced ride. For example an experienced or advanced rider would/should have a good knowledge of their surroundings at all times so shoulder checks and lifesavers are more of a precaution if we think it is warranted. During the basic riding test there is a procedure to carry out regardless or get marked down for it.
On another note lifesavers on Left & Right bends before positioning is not required as we need to look ahead as we travel at higher speeds. Just a mirror check is enough as if there are vehicles behind, nearside and offside positioning should not be as severe so we don't give following traffic misleading information as to our intentions.0 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
Ah right. Sorry I didn't know any of ye were instructors. With that in mind I'll take the advice on board, put it into practice and say a big thanks for all the input. I'll re-apply for my test when I have the money available.
For test no.3 I will do a shoulder check before changing position in my lane as well as the lifesaver before the corner. Hopefully that will suffice.
Its the inconsistency between examiners that lit my fuse here, not just that I failed. Failing for something that wasn't an issue at all in the first test, to me seems like one of the examiners was in the wrong. Either the first guy failed to be thorough enough to spot this mistake or the second tester was being a bit occ since she was under examination. Had it been mentioned in test no.1 it would have been fixed for test no.2
Anyway, thanks for all the help and advice
Remember - instructors are on your side. We will never be assholes for the sake of it, we will be assholes with a keen view to getting you to pass your test. Best of luck! 0
Advertisement